Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Programs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Riverside Unified reports enrollment gains and pilots dual‑enrollment in summer programs
Summary
District presentation showed increased summer participation across grade bands, strengthened early‑childhood outcomes and a pilot dual‑enrollment program with Riverside City College; total summer program cost reported at about $10.6 million.
Riverside Unified presented a comprehensive review of this year’s summer programs at the Aug. 21 board meeting, reporting increased participation and new dual‑enrollment offerings that district leaders said helped students advance credit and limit summer learning loss.
Dr. Angulo summarized results across age bands: early‑childhood programs served preschool students with measured gains in language, literacy and numeracy; elementary summer camp enrollment rose 22% to about 3,092 participants; nine middle‑school summer sites served roughly 793 students; and two high‑school summer sessions had roughly 3,032 and 2,922 students respectively. District staff said 98%+ of participating high‑school students earned credit where applicable.
The district launched a pilot dual‑enrollment partnership with Riverside City College that placed college‑credit courses at high schools: sample courses included communications at Arlington (approx. 22 students), a history course at Ramona (33 students), political science at North (34 students) and ethnic‑studies CCAP sections at King and Pauly (32 and 26 students). District leaders called the effort “promising” and said they plan to expand dual enrollment in future years.
Dr. Angulo reported total summer programming costs of about $10.6 million and highlighted that many students used summer offerings for enrichment or advancement rather than strictly credit recovery. The district also expanded its ninth‑grade preparation offerings and said participation in rising‑9th programs increased markedly from the previous year.
Public commenters asked for more granular outcome data (pre/post effect sizes, baseline numbers) and raised concerns about whether summer courses were being positioned as graduation requirements. Board members asked for enrollment breakdowns by site and subgroup (special education, English learners) and for course lists and counts for dual‑enrollment offerings; staff agreed to provide those details by email and in follow‑up materials.
Board members praised the dual‑enrollment pilot as a pathway to college credit and asked staff to explore ways to scale the program, including leveraging qualified district teachers as adjuncts to expand offerings.
